Oh My ........ They are retaining a lot of assistant coaches

[conraddobler]

If we're afraid of that with a particular candidate, then you obviously do not hire them. Trust them or don't trust them. Don't handicap them.

Exactly.

This can be done the right way or the wrong way, I can see myself taking the job and keeping a few of these guys after interviewing in that situation, I can also see myself heading up to Graves's office and saying I don't want any of them an at that point the fireworks could start.

Me "I want an all new staff"

Graves, "conrad, are you sure about this, we've got blah blah blah blah...."

Me "I'm sure"

Graves, "I'll get back to you on that"

The dynamic is kinda goofed IMO.

You almost have to make the call on assistants before you take the job, that's a little wacky to say the least, because if you take the job then find out you can't hire a or b, that would be stupid.

 

[Sandan]

This whole hiring fiasco, not allowing the new HC to pick his assistants (if that is true), and the extensions of Graves, is a joke and why the Cards will always be the Cards. Pathetic

They already said that is not true and then you go off like it is

 

[conraddobler]

They already said that is not true and then you go off like it is

It's not a complete non issue it does depend on exactly how they do what they say.

Graves input could be mild like, hey do what you want but please look at these guys they are good at their job.

It could also be more heavy handed than that to the point where your answer affects if you get the job or not.

None of us know the extent of "his input".

This dynamic will IMO skew who gets the job, I'm not saying it's the be all and end all but I am saying guys willing to look harder at these people will end up naturally tending toward the top of the list, it's a goofy thing to worry about in today's NFL, it's not how it's generally done for a reason.

 

[john h]

Okay, whew! Just as long as they are not trying to force them on the new coach.

Of course, any coach who mentions in their interview that they want to keep those assistants may well get the job.

A new coach will find it hard to find good assistants to hire. We have a low salary budget for assistants and a reputation to live down. A new coach may be one who is good enough that he has some guys that are willing to follow him or he may not. Sometimes the devil you know is bettter than the one you do not know. I am all for giving a new HC full authority to hire his assistants or else how can you hold him responsible for the outcome but the reality is he is probably going to have a tough time doing so given the Cards situation.

 

[DKCards]

If we're afraid of that with a particular candidate, then you obviously do not hire them. Trust them or don't trust them. Don't handicap them.

Worse case scenario; Grave’s dictates that he has to keep all the assistants in their current postions to save a few bucks.

Best case scenario; New HC has complete say on his staff. By not letting them go HC has first shot at keeping them/ reassigning them/ firing them as he sees fit.

Most likely scenario; Grave’s has a few untouchables for certain candidates. For example, If Chow gets the job CP will be kept on to run the defense. If Rivera gets the job then CP is expendable.

I really don’t have a problem with it as long as it is not the worse case scenario. Under the new rules in the NFL, quality coaches are harder to come by because any team can deny another team from talking to their assistants. So it has a greater upside then downside.

 

[Duckjake]

Because it's the only thing we have left to bitch about. Some people decided we would keep Green to save money and when that didn't happen, they needed something else to complain about. They've already beat Graves to death and this is just the scape goat needed to continue the lament.

I'm glad I have something other than this football team in my life. Hope springs eternal in the human breast unless you're a Cards football fan. Then it's "abandon all hope all ye who enter here".

C'mon folks. Lighten up. It's a brand new year and the Cards haven't lost a game yet.

I'm not worried. I know they'll lose eleven this year just like always.

 

[D-Dogg]

Most likely scenario; Grave’s has a few untouchables for certain candidates. For example, If Chow gets the job CP will be kept on to run the defense. If Rivera gets the job then CP is expendable.

Ouch, I would really hate that. That is a bad thing for HC candidates. At a minimum, they should be able to select their OC and DC outright and if they like K or Pendy, then great (not imo on pendy, but whatever). If they don't like them, so be it.

I don't want ANY untouchables...untouchables will turn off a HC candidate immediately.

 

[devilfan02]

Pendy sucks, I'm sick of him and his soft ass defense. I was at the Charger game and even the Charger fans were making fun of how far off the ball our DB's were playing. Same crap every game

 

[BACH]

Worse case scenario; Grave’s dictates that he has to keep all the assistants in their current postions to save a few bucks.

Best case scenario; New HC has complete say on his staff. By not letting them go HC has first shot at keeping them/ reassigning them/ firing them as he sees fit.

Most likely scenario; Grave’s has a few untouchables for certain candidates. For example, If Chow gets the job CP will be kept on to run the defense. If Rivera gets the job then CP is expendable.

I really don’t have a problem with it as long as it is not the worse case scenario. Under the new rules in the NFL, quality coaches are harder to come by because any team can deny another team from talking to their assistants. So it has a greater upside then downside.

I agree.

Only two coaching changes so far. That means fewer candidates on top of the new rules/practices making it harder to hire from other teams.

I think it's a very good solution. Don't you think a guy like Rivera appreciate having several quality coaches on offense already in place?

BUT! Buttom line is whether or not the new HC gets complete control over their futures.

 

[Stout]

Worse case scenario; Grave’s dictates that he has to keep all the assistants in their current postions to save a few bucks.

Best case scenario; New HC has complete say on his staff. By not letting them go HC has first shot at keeping them/ reassigning them/ firing them as he sees fit.

Most likely scenario; Grave’s has a few untouchables for certain candidates. For example, If Chow gets the job CP will be kept on to run the defense. If Rivera gets the job then CP is expendable.

I really don’t have a problem with it as long as it is not the worse case scenario. Under the new rules in the NFL, quality coaches are harder to come by because any team can deny another team from talking to their assistants. So it has a greater upside then downside.

In no way is this acceptable, and in no word would a good HC candidate accept such a command.

 

[DKCards]

In no way is this acceptable, and in no word would a good HC candidate accept such a command.

I know, We gave DG his say and look how well that turned out......

If Pete Carrol comes then let him have the say. If Norn Chow comes and Graves/Bidwill thinks that the level of coaches he can get are lesser then the ones already here then too bad. There are only 32 NFL HC postions in the world and only a few come open each year. Your not going to elimate that many canidates following those guidlelines.

 

[ajcardfan]

I know, We gave DG his say and look how well that turned out......

Sean Payton got his say look how well that turned out....
Eric Manging got his say look how well that turned out...

Art Shell did not get his say look how well that turned out....

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

They already said that is not true and then you go off like it is

Jim Mora was relived of his duties in Atlanta along with his entire staff. When (if) Saban leaves Miami the new coach will bring in his new staff. My friend (who is the HC at a major ACC school) when he leaves a job or takes another one he brings his staff with him.

It is a joke to think that this is even being considered.

 

[Stout]

Sean Payton got his say look how well that turned out....
Eric Manging got his say look how well that turned out...

Art Shell did not get his say look how well that turned out....

Thank you! Al Davis has proven without a doubt that this kind of thing just doesn't work.

In this process, the front office has to be able to weed out a candidate like DG and find the right one, so that they can trust the coach to do the right things. DG was known to have a penchant for cronyism, yet we went ahead anyway. In hindsight as a fan, that was stupid, and should have been addressed in the interview process. If you cannot trust the coach you just hired, you have failed miserably.

 

[Totally_Red]

Thank you! Al Davis has proven without a doubt that this kind of thing just doesn't work.

In this process, the front office has to be able to weed out a candidate like DG and find the right one, so that they can trust the coach to do the right things. DG was known to have a penchant for cronyism, yet we went ahead anyway. In hindsight as a fan, that was stupid, and should have been addressed in the interview process. If you cannot trust the coach you just hired, you have failed miserably.

Al Davis is Al Davis. What about Tampa Bay retaining most of their defensive coaches when Jon Gruden took over and WINNING the Super Bowl. Examples can be cited both ways.

I reserve my right to second guess the decision if Graves has veto power, but for now I'm more than ok with it.

 

[conraddobler]

Thank you! Al Davis has proven without a doubt that this kind of thing just doesn't work.

In this process, the front office has to be able to weed out a candidate like DG and find the right one, so that they can trust the coach to do the right things. DG was known to have a penchant for cronyism, yet we went ahead anyway. In hindsight as a fan, that was stupid, and should have been addressed in the interview process. If you cannot trust the coach you just hired, you have failed miserably.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Rod Graves provides a link to the past so as to assure that many things will keep being done as they were, when you lose you kill everything in sight, it's like the plauge or rabies, everything must die so that new stuff can grow without the stinking disease of loss.

 

[Stout]

Al Davis is Al Davis. What about Tampa Bay retaining most of their defensive coaches when Jon Gruden took over and WINNING the Super Bowl. Examples can be cited both ways.

I reserve my right to second guess the decision if Graves has veto power, but for now I'm more than ok with it.

I went back to read up on this, but could not find anything that said Gruden was forced to keep them. In all likelihood, he agreed to do so before accepting the job. If he didn't want them, he wouldn't have done it.

 

[Russ Smith]

If you read Urban's columns on the firing etc it's pretty clear that Graves DOES intend for the new coach to retain some of the coaches. He outright says it.


The new coach is going to be asked to evaluate the holdovers, and the implication from Graves Monday was — in the spirit of continuity — some should be kept as the team goes forward.

“I just didn’t think a wholesale turnover of this staff was necessary,” Graves said.

From that I take there are certain assistants the Cards consider essentially untouchable.

 

[BACH]

Sean Payton got his say look how well that turned out....
Eric Manging got his say look how well that turned out...

Art Shell did not get his say look how well that turned out....

Remind me....

Who did Al Davis want to keep?

And do the Raiders suck because of their offense or their defense?

 

[D-Dogg]

From that I take there are certain assistants the Cards consider essentially untouchable.

 

[ajcardfan]

Remind me....

Who did Al Davis want to keep?

And do the Raiders suck because of their offense or their defense?

When you have cancer, you don't take out half a tumor.

The Raiders got worse. What a great precedent to follow.

 

[Redsz]

Lets see who is retained before everyone gets worked up again. I mean, is having Loney or Kruzcek (sp?) on the staff going to be the end of days?

 

[Redsz]

When you have cancer, you don't take out half a tumor.

The Raiders got worse. What a great precedent to follow.

Maybe because of who the HC brought in? Sounds like Davis maybe made the right choice?

Just because the HC chooses to bring in a guy doesn't make it the right one or the best one.

 

[Russ Smith]

Lets see who is retained before everyone gets worked up again. I mean, is having Loney or Kruzcek (sp?) on the staff going to be the end of days?

no, I just think if I'm reading Urban right on what Graves said, that absolutely DID say some of this staff is being retained. He's not saying the new coach will have final say and can clean house if he wants to, he's saying a total overhaul will not happen.

If you keep the right guys and the new coach is able to work with them it's a head start, if you hamper your search because most of your choices won't accept not having total say in their staff, it's a bad move.

That's why I am pretty convinced we want to hire Chow, I think this is something they've already discussed and know how he feels about it.

 

[ajcardfan]

Lets see who is retained before everyone gets worked up again. I mean, is having Loney or Kruzcek (sp?) on the staff going to be the end of days?

For me, the problem is we seem to want to keep almost the entire defensive staff. The unit did horribly this year, no way around it. Loney and Kruzcek are one thing, the other side of the ball is something else. I wonder what the heck games they've been watching.

We should know better. We did the same thing with McGinnis and that was a fiasco.